Update on State "Communications Services" Laws

stwrtpj writes "The Electronic Frontier Foundation is reporting a breaking news item: Colorado Governor Owens has vetoed a super-DMCA-like bill similar to the one passed in Michigan." Felten has a comment on the Colorado bill. Tennessee is delaying their consideration of the bill. And Oregon's bill has died for now; see below for more.

babbage_ct writes "As has been reported on Slashdot before (see here, here, and here for just a few) the MPAA is pushing so-called Super-DMCA laws in states around the country. Well, score one for the good guys. Oregon's version, SB 655 is going to die. Turns out the sponsor was scammed by MPAA lobbyist. See the e-mail from legislative staff below.

From: "Staff SenCharlesStarr"
To:
Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2003 5:17 PM
Subject: Status of SB 655

Status of SB 655:

SB 655 is slated to die in committee this session. It is no longer an immediate threat, however, there will be a study commission appointed over the interim. Sen. Minnis decided that the issue was too complex to resolve this session. I will attempt to inform you when the commission is formed so that you can have further input. Oregon truly dodged the bullet on this. Some states passed the MPAA model legislation before the IT community even knew it existed.

The email you sent to Sen. Starr (and I hope all of the committee members) helped to stop this dangerous legislation. Good job! In case you're wondering why Sen. Starr sponsored this bill in the first place, it was requested by the MPAA lobbyist (who really is a nice guy) but Sen. Starr was told that it was a simple bill to update copyright law in relation to digital media. Yes, and a whole lot more! As the full impact of the bill became clear, Sen. Starr withdrew his support, which contributed to the bill's "unfortunate demise."

If you have any further questions, please feel free to ask.

Ken McDermott
Legislative Assistant
Senator Charles Starr
900 Court St NE S-312
Salem, OR 97301
staff.sencharlesstarr@state.or.us

Comments

Please remember his name during election time.

[damu]

nt.

Re:Please remember his name during election time.

[bobdinkel]

Excuse me? Vote for a guy who can not understand the bills he is backing? Hell, no! This guy is dangerous, he shouldn't be allowed in Politics!

No. This is a guy that listened to his constituents. And now he's more sensitive to these issues and is less likely to take lobbyists at their word. He'd have my vote in a heartbeat.

Maybe writing your congressman CAN help!

[g_adams27]

> The email you sent to Sen. Starr (and I hope all of the committee
> members) helped to stop this dangerous legislation. Good job!

Wow! I guess maybe one guy writing his congressman can make a difference! I'm glad that there are some sponsors of bills like this who don't supporting super-DMCA-type bills because they're eeeeeeeeevil, but because they simply don't recognize the consequences of their legislation and are willing to change when they realize what they're actually sponsoring. I'm also glad this senator apparently had a legislative aid with some sense to oppose the bill!

Get involved

[geekoid]

politics effect your life, now and in the future.
To not get involved is akin to not monitoring your servers and hoping all will always be fine. Then when it isn't fine, you just complain.

Waking Up

[Nom du Keyboard]

Hopefully this signals that people are finally waking up to what is essentially a stealth campaign to end the doctrine of Fair Use. It is now being exposed for what it really is, nothing more than attempts to take away rights you already have in order to better line the pockets of a few, already rich, companies.

Now if they public could only realize why they would benefit from undoing the last several copyright extensions as well.

And that legislative assistant may have called the MPAA lobbiest a nice guy, but I don't agree. He obviously lied about the bill to get it introduced. I'd never let that guy in my office again!

Re:Democracy?

[RealAlaskan]

Would it be fair to say that are elected officals only agenda is to do whatever the mega-corporation of the week has to say should be law?

No. It would be fair to say that our elected officials' only agenda is to get re-elected. If mega-corp-of-the-week is more effective at aiding that cause than we are, they get to write the laws. If we're more effective, WE get to.

Are there actually elected officals who are are looking out for the common person's liberties, and such? If so, why are there not more of them?

Not many, and they won't be there long, unless the common people bother to find out who they are, and support them. We can support the good guys with money, but that won't go far if mega-corp-of-the-week decides to target them by funding their opponents. We can support the good guys by telling everyone we know WHY they're good. We can support the good guys with our time, by volunteering in their campaigns, year after year.

It's all either expensive, or time-consuming, or both. That's why the mega-corps (and the mega-unions) generally do better at getting their way than we do.